ajax

Nope, my photos aren't searchable either. Maybe a minimum ratings or outdated database issue.

Carrie and anyone interested in checking whether their monitor settings are usable should visit <a href=http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo.tcl?photo_id=1334779"> this link on Photo.net</a>. If you can contribute with some information, even better!

I've already asked why some people have the link and some dont, and I had this impression that sometimes it would disapear. I'm looking forward to hear from Photo.net about this.

<br>

Anyway, you can copy and paste a "highest rated" from someone else and change rater id to your photo.net id.

<br>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/gallery/photocritique/one-critic?rater=603388&period=2000&mem=1"> http://www.photo.net/gallery/photocritique/one-critic?rater=603388&period=2000&mem=1 </a>

Could it be someone trying to exchange 7/7s?

 

It was possible to delete ratings until a few days ago.

I don't own photo gear anymore, so I won't be able to acomplish assignments unless old photos count (or a ocasional mom's point-and-shot pix). I could contribute with comments. Feel free to let me in or out, promise I wont be offended :)

Sorry :)

Uploading from local machine is covered in faq.

Your answer is <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=004WNB"> here </a> :)

It's pretty easy to have IE or Opera messing with your cookies when you don't want everybody out there dropping them in your box. So it might be worth to add PN to "aways allowed" cookies settings in your browser's options.

People can copy and paste troll's comment when responding. It's a useful feature, I have corrected typos and linked content using it.

Peter, you can turn the pull down menus off. I guess this bug simply isn't enough to make EVERY user unable to use this feature, specially when any giver user can turn it off.

I've seen some member pages that dont have a "highest rated" link. Is there any filter set to sort who should have it or not? Or is it just a feature that will disapear when this is fully implemented?

to my concerns about ratings system. Now we can have the best photos in critics opinion, plus every option we previously had, plus highest rated for any given user. Great improvement, megakudos for Photo.net, specially for the people involved in bringing this one to us!

Wonderful work, I can't stop smiling!

This really is something to be happy about. I hope more and more people understand the need to support the community so we can have these good surprises from time to time.

Now it *does* know when I last visited. "New Answers History" would be a nice feature.

Well my "last visit" date sometimes seems to be reset, usually to "we think was 03/13/03 13:20:58" :)

 

Checked my cookies settings and put photo.net in "always allow", I'll see what happens and report.

Stand ground, dave. And be fair.

 

As a member of Photo.net, you have the right to judge other ppl photos. You can be a better member if you comment on a photo's problems when rating low, so the photographer can use your feedback to improve (or to put your ratings in the right perspective).

 

If you use a 19" at 1600*1200 monitor, you can't rate low simply because a photo doesn't look right in your display. I get about half of your images displayed in my monitor, should I rate you low for that? (btw, there ARE size guidelines).

 

All in all, the explanation you got could be seen as an outline of what happened, but I have an alternative story. You rate brought the photographer's attention to your portfolio. Your pics are a test upload, so they are bad indeed. "If my pix was a 3/5, this should comparatively be a 1/1". Fair? What do you think?

 

Honest people do carry a burden. But keep in mind that you might learn a lot by telling what you really think and getting feedback on that. There will always be revenges (not sure if it happened in this case) from stupid people. But it can be worth the trouble.

 

You are invited to rate my photos anyway you want. Critics are always welcome. Unfair ratings that don't kill me only makes me stronger :))

For US users, <a href="http://paydirect.yahoo.com/">Yahoo! PayDirect</a> might be a good option. Amazon's service is called <a href="http://www.amazon.com/honorsystem/">Amazon Honor System</a>. It says "The Amazon Honor System charges minimal transaction fees. The fee schedule is very simple. The person making a payment is not charged any fees at all. The person receiving a payment is assessed 15% of the total payment per transaction plus $.15.".

 

If Photo.net is interested in adding ways of subscribing, I can go through registration process on some systems and gather information on fees, elegibility and user's opinion. I just don't want to make this homework before I hear there is some use for it.

I'm in process of faxing Paypal some documents (Brazil -> USA) so I can reset my long lost password and subscribe Photo.net. I REALLY don't like go through this, but it's well worth. Maybe having more alternative ways of subscribing could help increasing subscribers percentage. I was told amazon also has a payment system, but receivers pay a fee. Since it's a very popular site and allows many accounts per user (Paypal allows 2, only 1 "standard"), Photo.net could think about charging a bit more for the ease of using amazon's system.

That was just what I realized last night, Bob. But then... Big Brother IS watching :)

Terry, can you describe which photos were yours and what kind of response you got? Why is he doing this?

Ok Bob, I must agree with you. Proof IS needed and it simply isn't there. I've looking around (searching "nude" both in gallery and google) and can't find any duplicates either.

 

As you probably know, the "Mike Hill" in question is also a very recent member. But then, if that was enough, it would be fun to ban some new members just by accusing them at random :)

Carl, you gave a REALLY good answer :)

Bob, this guy's uploads consist of a single folder of photos he didn't take. I believe folder deletion should happen ASAP and user should make contact in 24h to avoid being banned.

 

Photo.net shouldn't keep a self-named copyright breaking folder online.

 

Best regards.

That would really be great, Scott. Hand picked curators (aka elves) really should have greater ratings weights. I thought of merits, but favoring skilled people is very important.

Some people, like Mary Ball and Nikos Moraitakis, have suggested

good ways to make "well done" ratings more important. My idea follows

along this way, without having to remove non-subscribers rating

rights.

 

Average (photos uploads, non-subscriber) member's rates would stay

as they are. Subscriber's rates would have weight 2 (count as 2 Av.

member when computing means). In the same way, weights for other

categories could be as follows:

No photos uploaded: 0.5

Comment added (min character, grammar check): 1.5

Hero: 1.5

 

These could be cumulative factors, so a subscriber that doesnt

upload nor comment wouldn't benefit much. A average user that leaves

good comments would have much more impact than a non-uploader,

numeric ratings addict.

 

I already see some problems (e.g., user status change, server load)

in this approach.

Advantages (stimulates comments and subscriptions, rewards heroes,

etc) may be good enough to make this worth. What do you think? Is

this possible?

Marc, Nikos Moraitakis explained the "ratings points" idea much better than I would. I'll start a thread on weighting rates (maybe having non-suscribers only comment is easier and as effective), but I have something to add to this one.

 

Perhaps a more interesting way to achieve the effect you desire by making all ratings public is having a way to distribute the pattern analising.

 

Brian could choose 10 people that would receive (or be able to download) the raw data, scripts and run them locally. I believe the relief on Photo.net's cpu usage and staff would allow better pattern matching scripts to evolve.